Earwigs (Dermaptera) of South Carolina, with a key to the eastern North American species and a checklist of the North American fauna

\3 Biodiversity
fe^Heritage
l^Library

http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org

Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington.

[Washington, etc. :Entomological Society of Washington]
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/2510

v89 1987: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/54981
Page(s): Text, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, Page 5, Page 6, Page 7, Page 8, Page 9, Page 10,

Page 1 1 , Page 1 2, Page 1 3, Page 1 4

Contributed by: Smithsonian Institution Libraries
Sponsored by: Smithsonian

Generated 28 June 2010 8:37 AM
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/pdf2/003489300054981

This page intentionally left blank.

PROC ENTOMOL. SOC. WASH,

89(1), 1987, pp. 1-14

EARWIGS (DERMAPTERA) OF SOUTH CAROLINA, WITH A KEY TO
THE EASTERN NORTH AMERICAN SPECIES AND A CHECKLIST

OF THE NORTH AMERICAN FAUNA

Kevin M, Hoffman

Department of Entomology, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina 29634

0365.

Abstract. — Biological and distributional data are given for the nine species of Dermap-
tera recorded from South Carolina. A key to the 17 eastern North American species is
presented along with brief notes on the taxonomy and distribution of all 22 species
occurring in North America north of Mexico.

The most recent comprehensive checklist
of North American Dermaptera was pub-
lished over 35 years ago (Gurney, 1950),
and the last key to the eastern North Amer-
ican species was published by Blatchley
(1920). In the intervening years new species
have been introduced, and the taxonomic
status of others has changed. This paper
documents the species occurring in South
Carolina, presents a revised checklist for the
species occurring in North America north
of Mexico, and provides a key to eastern
North American species. A similar study of
the Dermaptera of California provided a key
to most of the known western species
(Langston and Powell, 1975).

The order Dermaptera comprises some
1200 species worldwide, occurring mostly
in the tropics. Only 22 species are currently
known from North America, and at least
twelve of these were introduced from Eu-
rope and the tropics. Seventeen species have
been recorded from eastern North America,
nine of which have been found in South
Carolina, These nine are the most wide-
spread species in the east; the other eight
species are restricted to Florida and New
Jersey. The remaining five North American
species occur only in western United States.

A brief summary of the North American
records for non-South Carolina species fol-
lows.

There are eight eastern species not found
in South Carolina. Pyragropsis huscki (Cau-
dell) is a Caribbean species that has become
established in the Miami, Florida area (Gur-
ney, 1959). EuhoreUia amhigua (Borelli) was
originally described from Costa Rica and
has since been recorded from a mangrove
swamp near Miami, Florida (Hebard, 1922),
EuhoreUia caraihea Hebard, a species that
is widespread in the Caribbean Islands, has
been collected in sandy areas on Virginia
Key, Florida (Brindle, 197 Id). The char-
acters originally used by Hebard (1922) to
differentiate E. caraihea from E. amhigua
have shown considerable variation when a
larger series of £, caraihea was examined,
making it difficult to distinguish the two
species (Brindle, 197 Id). This difficulty is
reflected in the following key and awaits the
collection of a larger series of E. amhigua
before it can be resolved, Euborellia an-
nulata (F,), a native of Indonesia, was re-
corded by Townes (1946) from Miami,
Florida (as EuhoreUia stall [Dohrn, 1864a],
synonymized by Brindle, 1981). Specimens
of this species are in the Florida State Col-

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON

lection of Arthropods from as far north as
Daytona, Florida.

Labia curvicauda (Motschulsky), origi-
nally described from Ceylon, has been found
on Long Key, Florida, occupying the bases
of leaves in the tops of coconut palms (Rehn
and Hebard, 1912). Labia rehni Hebard is
known only from a single female found be-
tween boards in a woodshed on Key West,
Florida, on 7 July 1912 (Hebard, 1917;
Brindle, 1971a). Doru davisi Rehn and He-
bard is found onlv in southern Florida, es-
pecially around Lake Okeechobee, and is
usually associated with saw-grass (Gurney,
1972), Marava arachidis (Yersin) was de-
scribed from southern Europe and has sub-
sequently been introduced into southern
Florida (Caudell, 1913). This species has
been recorded from two localities in New
Jersey by Townes (1946) (as Marava wal-
lacei [Dohrn, 1864b], synonymized by
Boeseman, 1954). It has also been recorded
from Texas, Arizona, and California (He-
bard, 1943; Langston and Powell. 1975).

Five species occur only in western United
States. Chelisoches morio (F.) is a south Pa-
cific species that has been introduced into
California (Langston and Powell 1975),
EuhorelUa cincticollis (Gerstaeckcr) is an
African species that is now established in
California and Arizona (Langston and Pow-
ell 1975), Euborellia femoralis (Dohrn), an
Oriental species that is very similar to E*
annul i pes, has been recorded from Arizona
and California (Steinmann, 1981), Vostox
apicedentatus (Caudell) is a native species
that has been recorded from California, Ar-
izona, New Mexico, and Texas. It was listed
in the genus Spongovostox by Langston and
Powell (1975) but has been transferred to
the genus Vostox by Brindle (1971b), Vos-
tox excavatus Nutting and Gurney is known
only from Arizona, New Mexico, and
northwestern Mexico (Nutting and Gurney,
1961).

Labia pilicornis (Motschulsky, 1 863) was
listed by Gurney ( 1 950) as being established
in the United States, but no North Ameri-

can collection records were cited. A foot-
note associated with the listing stated that
Morgan Hebard considered Labia rehni to
be a junior synonym of L. pilicornis, so per-
haps it was included in the list in antici-
pation of this proposed synonymy. Because
subsequent workers have maintained the
two species as separate and no published
Nearctic records have been found, it is
doubtful that L, pilicornis occurs in North
America and thus is omitted from the
checklist below. In the Neotropical region,
L. pilicornis is known only from Cuba (Brin-
dle, 197 Id).

Earwigs exhibit sexual dimorphism in
both the number of abdominal segments and
the shape of the forceps. Males have ten
abdominal segments, whereas females have
only eight apparent segments due to the fu-
sion of the eighth and ninth segments with
the tenth (Giles, 1 963). The forceps of males
are generally curved and widely separated
at the base, and many species have one or
more prominent teeth on the inner margins
(Figs. 1 1-25). Female forceps are more or
less straight, usually closer together basally
than those of the male and lack prominent
teeth on their inner margins (Figs. 26-31).
Both sexes possess a divided plate called the
pygidium. which is located between the bas-
es of the forceps (Fig. 18). The pygidium is
thought to be derived from the epiproct and
is useful taxonomically, especially in males.

Immature earwigs undergo five to six in-
stars before reaching adulthood, Antennal
segments are added at each molt, and wing
pads begin to develop in the second or third
instar. Immatures are lighter in color than
adults and possess conspicuous ecdysial lines
on the head and thoracic terga. Immatures
have male-like, ten-segmented abdomens,
but have female-like, straight forceps.

Material for this study was examined from
the following institutions: North Carolina
State University, University of Georgia,
Florida State Collection of Arthropods, Na-
tional Museum of Natural History, and
Clemson University. The body length of

VOLUME 89, NUMBER 1

specimens was measured from the head to
the tip of the forceps. A brief diagnosis and
information on the synonymy, bionomics,
world distribution, and South Carolina dis-
tribution are given for those species record-
ed from South Carolina. The synonymy giv-
en for each South Carolina species is
complete unless otherwise noted, in which
case synonyms commonly used in previous
literature on Nearctic species are provided,
and a reference is cited which contains a
more complete synonymy. South Carolina
county records for each species include every
county from which the species has been col-
lected, but not necessarily every record from
those counties. The known North American
distribution of each species is included in
the following checklist, with states desig-
nated by the two-letter codens assigned by
the United States Postal Service. The rec-
ords used in compiling the checklist are con-
sidered to represent established popula-
tions, although it is possible that some may
represent transient infestations that have
since disappeared. The classification system
used in the checklist is that of Popham
(1965a, b).

Checklist of the North American
species of dermaptera

Superfamily Pygidicranoidea
Family Pygidicranidae
Subfamily Pygidicraninae
Pyragropsis buscki (Caudell, 1907);
FL.
Superfamily Labioidea
Family Carcinophoridae
Subfamily Carcinophorinae
Anisolahis maritima (Bonelli, 1832);

widespread on sea coasts.
Euborellia ambigua (Borelli, 1906);

FL.
Euborellia annulata (F., 1793); FL.
Euborellia annulipes {Lucas, 1847);

widespread.
Euborellia caraibea Hebard, 1922;
FL.

Euborellia cincticollis (Gerstaecker,

1883); AZ, CA.
Euborellia femoralis (Dohrn, 1863);

Family Labiidae
Subfamily Labiinae

Labia curvicauda (Motschulsky,

1863); FL.
Labia minor (L., 1758); widespread.
Labia rehni Hebard, 1917; FL.
Subfamily Spongiphorinae
Marava arachidis (Yersin, 1 860); AZ,

CA, TX, NJ, FL.
Marava pulchella (Audinet-Serville,

1839); southeastern U.S., TX.
Vostox apicedentatus (Caudell, 1 905);

AZ, CA, NM, TX.
Vostox brunneipennis (Audinet-Ser-
ville, 1839); eastern U.S., TX,
OK.
Vostox excavatus Nutting and Gur-
ney, 1961; AZ, NM.
Superfamily Forficuloidea
Family Labiduridae
Subfamily Labidurinae

Lahidura riparia (Pallas, 1773);
southeastern U.S., AZ, CA, TX,
OK.
Family Chelisochidae
Subfamily Chelisochinae
Cheiisoches morio (F., 1775); CA.
Family Forficulidae
Subfamily Forficulinae

Doru aculeatum (Scudder, 1876)

eastern U.S., Ontario.
Doru davisi Rehn and Hebard, 1914

FL.
Doru taeniatum (Dohrn, 1862)
southeastern U.S., AZ, CA, TX.
Forficuia auriculaha L., 1758; wide-
spread.

Key to Adults of the Eastern North
American Species of Dermaptera

l.

Tegminae absent or present only as
rounded flaps that do not meet at the inner
basal margins (Figs. 1 and 2); right forceps

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON

1

— £Ml — ms

<-.■?:*- mt

2

ts2

3

4

-4— te

— # — hw

7

6

8

9

10

Figs. 1*40. Thoracic terga, metatarsi, and antennal bases of Dermaptera. I, EuhorelUa annulata, thoracic
terga, dorsal view, 2, E. ambigua, thoracic terga (redrawn from Hebard, 1922), dorsal view, 3, Marava pulchella*
pronotum and wings of fully winged form, dorsal view. 4, M. arachidis, pronotum (redrawn from Brindle, 1 97 1),
dorsal view, 5, Doru aculeatum, right metatarsus, lateral view. 6, D. aculeatum, right metatarsus, dorsal view.
7, M puichella, right metatarsus, lateral view, 8, M. pulchella, right metatarsus, dorsal view. 9, Forficula
auricularia, base of right antenna, dorsal view. 10, D. aculeatum, base of right antenna, dorsal view. a4 = fourth
antennal segment, cl = tarsal claw, hw = hindwing, ms = mesonotum, mt = metanotum, pr = pronotum, te =
tegmina, tsl = first tarsal segment, ts2 = second tarsal segment, ts3 = third tarsal segment.

of male curved inward more strongly than
left {Figs. 1 1-12) (Carcinophoridae) ....
Tcgminae normally developed and meet-
ing along entire midline (Fig. 3); forceps
of male symmetrical (Figs. 14-25)

2(1). Tcgminae present as rounded lateral flaps
on mesonotum (Figs, 1 and 2); Florida .
Tegminae absent; widespread

3(2). Tegminal flaps widely separated on meso-
notum (Fig. 1); legs with brown rings
around femora and tibiae; left forceps of
male curved only at apex (Fig, 12) . . . . ,
EuhorelUa annulata (F.)

3
5

- Tegminal flaps covering most of meso-
notum (Fig. 2); legs unicolorous or femora
darkened; left forceps of male curved al-
most as much as right (Fig. 13) 4

4(3). Legs uniformly pale; tegminal flaps not
always meeting at midline (Fig. 2); found
only in mainland mangrove swamps . . .
EuhorelUa ambigua (Borelli)

- Legs pale or with femora darkened; teg-
minal flaps always meeting or overlapping
at midline; found in various habitats on
islands ...,...-..•. , Euboreilia caraihea Hebard

5(2). Antennae entirety dark brown, 20-24 seg-

VOLUME 89. NUMBER 1

^«a— a 10

-*■ i — pg

— fc

Figs 11-18. Male forceps of Dermaptera, dorsal views. 1 1 , Anisolabis maritima. 1 2, Euborellia annulipes.
13 £ a mbigiia (redrawn from Hebard, 1922). 14, Labia minor, 15,1* curvkauda (redrawn from Brindle, 1971a).
16, A/arara arackidis (redrawn from Brindle, 1971b). 17, M. pulchella. 18, Po^x brunneipennis. alO - tenth
abdominal segment, fc = forceps, pg = pygidium.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON

Figs. 19-25. Male forceps of Derma ptera, dorsal views. 19, Doru taeniatum. 20, D. aculeatum. 21, D. davisi
(redrawn from Gurney, 1972). 22, Pyragropsis huscki arcuate form (redrawn from Gurney, 1959). 23, P. bitseki,
elongate form (redrawn from Gurney, 1959). 24, Lahidura riparia. 25, Forficula auricularia.

mented; femora and tibiae without encir-
cling dark bands; body length 20-25 mm

Anisolahis mariiima (Bonelli)

Antennae brown with 1-3 white subapkal
segments, 1 4—1 8 segmented; femora and

6(1)

tibiae pale yellow with encircling dark

bands; body length 12-18 mm

Euborellia annulipes (Lucas)

Second tarsal segments cylindrical and not
wider than third, at most only slightly ex-

VOLUME 89, NUMBER 1

26

<

f

t /

f < \\ \

I \

I ■' I

i ■ '

•A

Ml f \0

\I.V*

k3

F rCl XV/^I

i f /',

r i\

,a

27

^JBft

■ jlfc

t' ' »

SI F * *

vt j r • J

■'■1

^ m

-i3f

fp* 1 nv

' vJv! r

'%>

tL- *

F f

v| *; ■

■ ■ + 'i^F'

29

31

Figs. 26-31. Female forceps of Dermaptera, dorsal views. 26, EuboreUia annulipes. 27, La&a minor, 28, L.
reftm (redrawn from Hebard, 1917). 29, Marava pidcheUa. 30, I os/ox brunneipennis. 31, Z)#ra aculeatum.

tended beneath third (Figs. 7 and 8) . . . 7 male pygidium prominent (Figs. 14-18)

Second tarsal segments dilated and much (Labiidae) , . . . 9

wider than third, extending conspicuously 9(8). Tegminac pubescent; body length less than

beneath third (Figs. 5 and 6)(Forficulidae) 8 mm .......... 10

. .,. 14 - Tegminae glabrous; body length 8-18

7(6). Large pad-like arolium between tarsal mm . . ^ • 12

claws; hindwings visible; body length 14- 10(9). Tegminae as long as pronotum; visible

19 mm; male forceps of two types, both portion of hindwings only half length of

forms curved strongly inward (Figs. 22 pronotum; inner margin of female forceps

and 23) ....... Pyragropsis huscki (Caudell) notched basally (Fig. 28)

No arolium between tarsal claws; hindw- . . ■ Labia rehni Hebard

ings visible or not; body length variable; - Tegminae much longer than pronotum;

male forceps not strongly incurved (Figs, visible portion of hindwings as long as

14-18) 8 pronotum; inner margin of female forceps

8(7). Antennae 25-30 segmented; pronotum not notched basally (Fig. 27) II

light brown with two dark longitudinal 11(10). Head and thorax black; abdomen reddish;

stripes; body length 20-30 mm; male py- male pygidium quadrate; inner margin of

gidium reduced and not visible in dorsal male forceps curved (Fig. 15) . .. . ,

view (Fig. 24) .... Lahidura nparia (Pallas) . Labia curvkauda (Motschulsky)

Antennae 10^16 segmented; pronotum - Body yellowish-brown to brown; male py-

unicolorous; body length less than 20 mm; gidium elongated medially; inner margin

8

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON

of male forceps straight (Fig. 14) ,

. . Labia minor (L.)

12(9). Male pygidium large, produced medially
(Fig, 18); hindwings always present; an-
tennae entirely brown; body length 12-16

mm . , Vast ox brunneipennis

(Audinet-Serville)

- Male pygidium not produced medially
(Figs, 16-17); hindwings often absent or
concealed; basal 2-3 antennal segments
yellow, remainder brown; body length 8-

12 mm 13

1 3( 1 2). Pronotuni broader than long (Fig. 4); male
pygidium pentagonal; male forceps with-
out inner basal tooth (Fig. 16)

Marava arachidis (Yersin)

- Pronotum as broad as long (Fig. 3): male
pygidium quadrate; male forceps with in-
ner basal tooth (Fig. 17) . . Marava pulchella

(Audinet-Serville)
14(6). Fourth antennal segment less than twice
as long as broad (Fig. 9); tegminae dark
brown; male pygidium truncate; male for-
ceps broadened, almost touching basally
(Fig. 25) . ... *.. .... .... Forficula auricular ia L.

- Fourth antennal segment more than twice
as long as broad (Fig. 1 0); tegminae yellow
with brown inner margins; male pygi-
dium spine-like; male forceps widely sep-
arated at base (Figs. 1 9-2 1 ) . . . . , 15

15(14). Hindwings visible beyond tegminae . . .

Dora taeniatum (Dohrn)

Hindwings not visible beyond tegminae 16

16(15). Male forceps with tooth near apex (Fig.
20); male pygidium distinctly shorter than

length of last abdominal segment

Doru aculealum (Scudder)

- Male forceps without tooth near apex (Fig,
21); male pygidium as long as length of
last abdominal segment Doru davisi

Rehn and Hebard

Dermaptera of South Carolina

Anisolabis maritima (Bone Mi, 1832)

Fig. 1 1

Forficula maritima Bonelli, 1832, in Gene,
Ann. Sei. Regn, Lomb.-Venet. 2: 224.

Anisolabis maritima (Bonelli) Fieber, 1853,
Lotos 3: 257,

Steinmann (1984) gives a more complete
synonymy,

Anisolabis maritima can be distinguished
from the other wingless species occurring in

South Carolina by the 20-24 segmented an-
tennae, lack of dark encircling bands on the
legs, and 20-25 mm body length. This
species has been cited as A. maritima (Gene,
1 832) in earlier papers. Anisolabis maritima
is usually found underneath litter and drift-
wood along seashores (Langston, 1974), This
earwig forages at night and is predaceous;
its prey includes crickets, sandfleas, and
smaller earwigs (Bennett, 1904).

This species is essentially cosmopolitan.
Introduced into North America, A. mari-
tima now occurs locally along the Pacific
coast from British Columbia south to Cal-
ifornia, and along the Atlantic and Gulf
coasts from Maine to Florida and westward
to Texas (Langston and Powell, 1975).

South Carolina Records,— Anisolabis
maritima probably occurs locally along the
entire South Carolina coast. Beaufort Co,:
Beaufort, 14 June 1930, coll. O. L. Cart-
wright, 1 2; Bluffton, 2 April 1933, coll. D.
Dunavan, 1 &, 2 9, 2 immatures, Horry Co.:
30 August 1981, coll. S. Mudge, 1 3. Pickens
Co,: Clemson, 23 June 1980, under board
in barn, coll. C. Lay, 12.

Euborellia annulipes (Lucas, 1847)

The Ringlegged Earwig
Figs. 12, 26

Forficesila annulipes Lucas, 1847, Ann. Soc.
Entomol, Fr. 5: 84.

Anisolabis annulicornis Blanchard, 1851, in
Gay, Hist. Fisica Pol Chile, ZooL 6: 10.

Euborellia annulipes (Lucas) Burr, 1915, J.
R. Microsc. Soc, 35: 545.

Sakai (1970a) gives a more complete syn-
onymy.

The ringlegged earwig can be distin-
guished from the only other wingless species
in South Carolina by its 14-18 segmented
antennae, dark encircling bands on the fem-
ora and tibiae, and 12-18 mm body length.
The dark brown antennae generally have the
third, fourth, and sometimes fifth subapical
segments pale yellow to white, although a
few specimens show only one or no pale
segments.

VOLUME 89, NUMBER 1

Euborellia annulipes is a general scav-
enger that is commonly found on the ground
underneath rocks, logs, and other debris.
This earwig can cause minor damage to
plants and stored foods when it enters
greenhouses, nurseries, and warehouses
(Bharadwaj, 1 966). However, it is also pre-
daceous and will attack other insect pests.
The ringlegged earwig is an introduced
species that occurs worldwide. It has been
established in North America for at least
1 40 years and now occurs virtually through-
out the United States and into British Co-
lumbia (Langston and Powell. 1975; Scud-
der and Vickery, 1985).

South Carolina Records. —The ringlegged
earwig is the most commonly encountered
species in the state. Aiken Co.: Windsor. 25
November 1933, coll. O. L. Cartwright, 1
9. Anderson Co.: Pendleton, 31 October
1975, in cotton trash, coll. P. Zinsmelster,
1 <3, 1 2, 2 immatures. Barnwell Co.: Elko,
30 July 1981, debris under pig feeding
trough, coll. J. R. Brush wein, 1 6, 2 2, 1
immature. Beaufort Co.: Beaufort, 30 Oc-
tober 1925, under trash, coll. F. Sherman,
1 immature. Charleston Co.: Charleston, 5
May 1951, coll. D. Dunavan, 1 2. Cherokee
Co.: Gaffney, 15 August 1939, coll. L. M.
Sparks, 1 2. Clarendon Co.: Summerton, 31
March 1929, coll. O. L. Cartwright, 1 im-
mature. Colleton Co.: Bear Island, 30 Sep-
tember 1979, grass, coll. B. Hendrix, 1 2.
Darlington Co.: Darlington. 19 June 1929,
coll. J. M. Napier, 1 9. Dorchester Co.: Sum-
merville, 1 5 August 1931, F. Sherman, 1 6.
Edgefield Co.: Trenton, 1 9 November 1 959,
trunk of peach tree, coll. T. E. Skelton, 1
immature. Florence Co.: Florence, 17 July
1981, leaf litter, coll. R. D. Simpson, 2 2.
Lee Co.: Meredith, 22 June 1926, coll. O.
L. Cartwright, 1 <?, 1 2. Oconee Co.: Fairplay,
18 October 1984, under feathers in chicken
house, coll. W. Barton, 2 immatures.
Orangeburg Co.: Orangeburg, 22 July 1927,
coll. F. Sherman, 1 2. Pickens Co.: Clemson,
1 December 1983, beneath rock in garden,
coll. J. Joly, 1 2, 2 immatures. Richland Co.:
Columbia, 21 February 1926, O. Cart-

wright, 1 9. Spartanburg Co.: Greer, 31 Oc-
tober 1976, coll. M. McClimon, 1 2,

Labia minor (L., 1758)
Figs. 14, 27

Forficula minor Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat.
(10) 1: 423, no. 2.

Labia minor (L.) Stephens, 1835, 111. Brit.
Entomol., Mand. 6: 8.

Labia minuta Scudder, 1862, Boston J. Nat.
Hist. 7: 415.

Sakai (1970b) gives a more complete syn-
onymy.

Labia mi nor is distinguished from all oth-
er earwigs in South Carolina by both the
abundance of golden hair covering most of
its body and its small body size (less than
8 mm long). It resembles a small rove beetle
(Staphylinidae) and as such is often put into
unsorted collections of these beetles. Labia
minor is both a scavenger and a predator
and can be found under various kinds of
debris. It flies readily and is frequently at-
tracted to lights. Labia minor is found in
temperate and subtropical zones worldwide
and is another species that has been intro-
duced into the Nearctic region. Like E. an-
nulipes, it is now distributed throughout
North America (Langston and Powell, 1975;
Scudder and Vickery, 1985).

South Carolina Records. — Labia minor is
presently known only from the extreme
northwestern part of the state. It may well
occur in other parts of the state, being com-
monly overlooked because of its small size.
Anderson Co.: Pendleton, 28 July 1972, in
cottonseed, coll. R. P. Griffin, 1 2. Pickens
Co.: Clemson, 23 June 1956, in light trap,
coll. D. Dunavan, 1 &\ Clemson, 19 Septem-
ber 1985, in cattle feed at Clemson Univ.
dairy barn, coll. K. M. Hoffman, 1 imma-
ture; Clemson, 5 October 1984, flying in
field, coll. J. Barron, 1 6; Clemson, 20 April
1939, at light, coll. F. T. Arnold, 1 6.

Marava pulchella (Audinet-Serville, 1839)

Figs. 3, 7, 8, 17, 29

Forficula pulchella Audinet-Serville, 1839,
Hist. Nat. Ins. Orthop. p. 42.

10

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON

Labia guttata Scudder, 1876b, Proc. Boston
Soc. Nat. Hist. 18: 265.

Labia burgessi Scudder, 1876b, Proc. Bos-
ton Soc. Nat. Hist. 18: 266.

Labia melancholica Scudder, 1876b, Proc.
Boston Soc. Nat. Hist. 18: 267.

Prolabia pulchella (Audinet-Serville) He-
bard, 1917, Entomol. News 28: 319.

Laprohia pulchella (Audinet-Serville)
Hincks, 1960, Proc. R. Entomol. Soc.
Lond. (B)29: 156.

Marava pulchella (Audinet-Serville) Brin-
dle, 1971a, J. Nat. Hist. 5: 557.

Marava pulchella is the only earwig in
South Carolina that exhibits both fully
winged and brachypterous adults. When the
tegminae and hindwings are fully devel-
oped, the hindwings are visible, somewhat
lighter in color basally, and the compound
eyes are large. Brachypterous individuals
have shorter tegminae, hindwings that are
either absent or concealed, and smaller
compound eyes. Factors governing the rel-
ative proportions of these morphs in a pop-
ulation are not known for M. pulchella, but
temperature has been shown to be influ-
ential for a different species (Knabke and
Grigarick, 1971). Each branch of the male
forceps generally has two teeth located api-
cally and basally on the inner margin, al-
though in some specimens the apical tooth
may be missing.

This earwig can be found under the bark
of dead trees and in debris. Fully winged
adults can be attracted to lights. Marava
pulchella is native to southeastern United
States, being found from North Carolina
south to Florida and westward to Texas. It
has also been recorded from Cuba (Alayo
and Hernandez, 1980).

South Carolina Records.— Marava pul-
chella probably occurs statewide. Anderson
Co.: Pendleton, 28 July 1972, in cotton seed,
coll. R. P. Griffin, 1 S. Florence Co.: Flor-
ence, 29 March 1930, coll. O. L. Cartwright,
1 3, 1 immature. Hampton Co.: Yemassee,
5 January 1928, coll. J. A. Berly, 1 <5; Ye-

massee, 28 December 1941, coll. O. L. Cart-
wright, 1 S. Lee Co.: Meredith, 19 April
1928, coll. O. L. Cartwright, 1 3. Pickens
Co.: Clemson, 7 March 1935, coll. J. G.
Watts, 1 immature; Clemson, 20 October
1972, hickory log, coll. R. P. Griffin, 1 3;
Isaqueena Forest, 2 August 1984, UV light
trap, coll. K. M. Hoffman, 1 9; Clemson, 15
August 1986, porchlight, coll. K. M. Hoff-
man, 1 6. Richland Co.: Columbia, 20 Feb-
ruary 1926, coll. O. Cartwright, 1 imma-
ture.

Vostox brunneipennis
(Audinet-Serville, 1839)

Figs. 18, 30

Psalidophora brunneipennis Audinet-Ser-
ville, 1839, Hist. Nat. Ins. Orthop. p. 30.

Vostox brunneipennis (Audinet-Serville)
Burr, 1911, Genera Insect. 122: 51.

This earwig is a reddish-brown to dark
brown species with yellow hindwings that
are bordered on their apical and inner mar-
gins with brown. The male forceps usually
have a single tooth located on the inner mar-
gin near the midpoint, although some spec-
imens possess a second tooth distally (Fig.
1 8). This species is most commonly found
under the bark of dead trees, but adults can
also be attracted to lights.

Vostox brunneipennis, a native species, is
found from Panama northward to the
southern United States. The holotype is from
Pennsylvania, and in the United States this
species is known from Illinois, Indiana, and
Virginia south to Florida and westward to
Texas and Oklahoma (Brindle, 1971b; Ar-
nold and Drew, 1979).

South Carolina Records. — Vostox brun-
neipennis probably occurs statewide. An-
derson Co.: Anderson, 1 1 March 1982, coll.
G. Jones, 1 3. Greenwood Co.: Greenwood,
5 February 1977, coll. P. Ellenburg, 1 9. Lee
Co.: Meredith, 12 February 1927, coll. O.
L. Cartwright, 1 S, 3 9. Pickens Co.: Clem-
son, 9 January 1986, under bark of dead
standing oak tree, coll. J. R. Brush wein, 1

VOLUME 89, NUMBER 1

II

6; Clemson, 1 August 1956, in trap light,
coll. D. Dunavan, 1 9; Six Mile, 17 October
1973, under log, coll. R. Peigler, 1 imma-
ture. Saluda Co.: Ridge Spring, 25 July 1984,
under bark of dead oak tree on ground, coll.
D. E. Scotten, 2 im matures.

Labidura riparia (Pallas, 1773)

The Striped Earwig
Fig. 24

Forficula riparia Pallas, 1773, Reise Russ.

Reiches 2: 727.
Forficula bidens Olivier, 1791, Encycl.

Method. 6: 466.
Forficula erythrocephala Fabricius, 1793,

Entomol. Syst. 2: 4.
Labidura riparia (Pallas) Dohrn, 1863, Stett.

Entomol. Zeit. 24: 313.
For a more complete synonymy, see Stein-

mann (1978).

The striped earwig is most easily recog-
nized by both its large size and the two dark
bands running the length of the pronotum.
Also, there is a broad, dark, medio-dorsal
band extending the length of the abdomen.
This species is primarily predaceous, ac-
tively seeking its prey at night (Schlinger et
al., 1 959). It can be collected on the ground
at night or under debris during the day.

Labidura riparia is an introduced species
that occurs worldwide in both tropical and
temperate zones. In the United States this
earwig is established in the southern third
of the country, from North Carolina south
to Florida and westward to Texas, Arizona,
and California (Langston and Powell, 1975).

South Carolina Records.— The striped
earwig is found throughout the state. Barn-
well Co.: Blackville, 24 October 1975, Ed-
isto Expt. Sta., pitfall traps from soybeans,
coll. J. F. Price, 5 3, 5 9. Beaufort Co.: Sea-
brook, 18 October 1980, coll. M. K. Disney,
1 immature. Charleston Co.: Charleston, 7
February 1934, coll. J. A. Berly, 1 <3. Edge-
field Co.: Trenton, 19 November 1959,
trunk of peach tree, coll. T. E. Skelton, 1 <5.
Greenville Co.: Greenville, 30 September

1933, coll. H. T. Poe, Jr., I s. Horry Co.:
Myrtle Beach, 27 December 1955, in dwell-
ing of Joe C. Ivey, coll. D. Dunavan, I 3, 1
5. Pickens Co.: Clemson, 10 October 1961,
under wood slat, coll. R. E. O'Brien, 1 im-
mature; Clemson, 26 September 1984, on
cement beneath lights at night, coll. K. M.
Hoffman, 1 9. Sumter Co.: Sumter, Febru-
ary 1955, coll. unknown, 1 immature.

Doru aculeatum Scudder, 1876

Figs. 5,6, 10, 20, 31

Forficula aculeata (Scudder, 1876a, Proc.
Boston Soc. Nat. Hist. 18: 262.

Doru aculeatum (Scudder) Rehn and He-
bard, 1914, J. N.Y. Entomol. Soc. 22: 93.

Doru aculeatum is 12-18 mm long, and
can be distinguished from the closely related
species D. taeniatum by the lack of visible
hindwings. This earwig is generally found
on grasses and sedges growing near water
(Hebard, 1934; Cantrell, 1968). Doru acu-
leatum is native to eastern North America,
ranging from southern Michigan and On-
tario to Florida and westward to Illinois,
Nebraska, and Louisiana.

South Carolina Records.— Doru aculea-
tum has only been found in the extreme
northwestern part of the state and at Myrtle
Beach. Anderson Co.: Portman Shoals, 24
November 1 927, coll. F. Sherman, 2 <3, 1 9.
Horry Co.: Myrtle Beach, 1 March 1965,
sedge, coll. V. M. Kirk, 2 $. Oconee Co.:
Seneca, 10 September 1969, on jewel weed,
coll. J. W. Van Duyn, 1 S. Pickens Co.:
Clemson, 1 4 October 1961, in corn ear, coll.
J. A. DuRant, 3 <5, 1 9; Pickens, 28 March
1978, coll. J. Keith, 1 <5; Rocky Bottom, 22
May 1934, coll. O. L. Cartwright, 1 $; Six
Mile, 26 October 1963, under dead willow
bark, coll. D. G. Bottrell, 1 6, 1 9.

Dom taeniatum (Dohrn, 1862)

Fig. 19

Forficula taeniata Dohrn, 1862, Stett. Ento-
mol. Zeit. 23: 230.

12

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON

Forficula calif or nica Dohrn, 1865, Stett.
Entomol. Zeit. 25: 85.

Forficula exilis Scudder, 1876a, Proc. Bos-
ton Soc. Nat. Hist. 18: 262.

Dora exile (Scudder) Burr, 1911, Genera In-
sect. 122: 79.

Doru lineare (Eschscholtz) Burr, 1911, Gen-
era Insect. 122: 79 {partim).

Doru taeniatum (Dohrn) Brindle, 1971c,
Papeis Avulsos Zool. 23: 191.

Doru taeniatum is distinguished from the
closely related D. aculeatum by the presence
of visible hindwings. The species Doru lin-
eare (Eschschlotz, 1822) is listed by Blatch-
ley (1920), Gurney (1950), and Langston
and Powell ( 1 975) as occurring in the United
States. However, a revision of the genus
Doru has shown the range of this species to
be limited to Brazil, Argentina, and Para-
guay (Brindle, 1971c). Records of this species
in North America are now referrable instead
to D. taeniatum (Gurney, 1972).

Doru taeniatum ranges from Bolivia and
Colombia northward to the southeastern
United States (Brindle, 1971c). It has been
found as far north as Maryland and as far
west as Texas, Arizona, and California. It
is unclear whether it is native to North
America or was introduced from Central
and South America (Gurney, 1972).

South Carolina Records.— Doru taenia-
tum probably occurs locally statewide, but
seems to be more prevalent in the southern
and eastern counties. Barnwell Co.: Black-
ville, 18 October 1978, on soybeans, coll.
G. Sanders, 1 9. Berkeley Co.: St. Stephen,
17 September 1983, coll. T. Johnson, 1 <3.
Charleston Co.: Charleston, 17 March 1980,
coll. M. Wallace, 1 $. Dorchester Co.: Four
Holes Swamp, 13 August 1976, Mellards
Lake, coll. J. Morse and J. Chapin. 1 2.
Hampton Co.: 1 October 1983, coll. D. Ed-
wards, 1 6. Horry Co.: Conway, 20 March
1976, woods, coll. T. Thompson, I 9. Pick-
ens Co.: Clemson, 16 March 1976, on
ground, coll. C. Wilson, 1 <3; Clemson, 10
October 1976, coll. T. Currin, 1 adult;

Clemson, 1 8 September 1978, coll. C. Whit-
mire, 1 9.

Forficula auricularia L., 1758

The European Earwig
Figs. 9, 25

Forficula auricularia Linnaeus, 1758, Syst.
Nat. (10) 1:423, no. 1.

Sakai (1973) gives a more complete syn-
onymy.

The European earwig is 15-20 mm in
length and can be recognized by the basally
broadened forceps of the male (Fig. 25). It
is the most economically destructive ear-
wig, occasionally causing substantial dam-
age to cereals, fruits, seedling vegetables, and
flowers. Unlike most earwigs, the European
earwig does not survive well in warm cli-
mates, preferring instead cool, moist re-
gions (Crumb et al., 1941). The European
earwig occurs in temperate regions around
the world and has become widely estab-
lished in North America. It has been re-
corded locally across southern Canada
southward to North Carolina and westward
to Arizona and California (Langston and
Powell, 1975: Scudder and Vickery, 1985).

South Carolina Records.— The only re-
cord of this species in South Carolina is of
a female taken in Charleston. Due to this
species 1 preference for cool climates and the
fact that Charleston is a major seaport, it is
possible that this specimen is an adventive
and not a member of an established popu-
lation. Further collecting is necessary to de-
termine whether the European earwig is es-
tablished in South Carolina. Charleston Co.:
Charleston, 30 October 1983, coll. B. F. Ce-
lek, 1 9.

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to the following for allowing
me to examine material: Lewis Deitz and
Carol Parron (North Carolina State Uni-
versity), Cecil Smith (University of Geor-
gia), Lionel Stange (Florida State Collection
of Arthropods) and David Nickle (Agricul-

VOLUME 89, NUMBER 1

13

tural Research Service, USDA, National
Museum of Natural History). Gratitude is
also extended to Peter H. Adler and John
C. Morse (Clemson University) for review-
ing the manuscript. This is Technical Con-
tribution No. 2593 of the South Carolina
Agricultural Experiment Station, Clemson
University.

Literature Cited

Alayo, D. and L. R. Hernandez. 1980. Introduccion
al esludio del orden Dermaptera, In forme eient-
tec. Acad. Cienc. Cuba, No, 132: 1-30.

Arnold, D. C and W. A. Drew. 1979. Earwigs (Der-
maptera) of Oklahoma. Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci. 59:
115-116.

Audinet-Serville, J, G. 1839, Histoire naturelle des
insectes, Orlhoptcres. Paris. 777 pp.

Bennett, C. B. 1904. Earwigs (Anisolabis mariiima
Bon/). Psyche 1 1: 47-53.

Bharadwaj, R. K. 1966. Observations on the bio-
nomics of Euhoreilia anmtiipes {Dermaptera: La-
biduridae). Ann. Entomol, Soc. Am, 59: 441-450,

Blanchard, E. 1851. Orden IV, Orthopteros, pp. 1-
84, In Gay, C, Histona fisica y politica de Chile,
Zoologica. Vol. 6. Paris. 152 pp.

Blatchley, W. S. 1920, Orthoptera of Northeastern
America with special reference to the faunas of
Indiana and Florida. Nature Publ, Co., Indianap-
olis. 784 pp.

Boeseman, M. 1954. The Dermaptera in the Mu-
seums at Leiden and Amsterdam. Zool. Verb. Lei-
den 21: 1-122,

Bonellu F.-A. 1832. In Gene, G,, Saggio di una
monographie delle Forficule indigene, Ann. Sci.
Nat. Regn. Lomb.-Venet. 2: 215-228.

Borelli, A. 1 906. Forficole di Costa Rica. Boll, Musei
Zool, Anat, Torino 21: 1-19,

Brindle, A. 1971a. A revision of the Labiidae (Der-
maptera) of the Neo-tropical and Nearctic regions
II. Geracinae and Lahiinae. J. Nat. Hist. 5: 155-
182,

. 1971b. A revision of the Labiidae (Dermap-
tera) of the Neotropical and Nearctic regions III.
Spongiphorinae. J. Nat. Hist. 5: 521-568.

. 1971c, A revision of the genus Doru Burr

(Dermaptera, Forficulidae). Papeis Avulsos Zool,,

Sao Paulo 23: 173-196.

— . 197 Id. The Dermaptera of the Caribbean.

Stud. Fauna Curacao other Caribbean Islands, 131,

38: 1-75,

— . 1 98 1 . The types of Dermaptera described by

Burr, M. 1911. Dermaptera. Genera Insectorum 1 22:
1-112,

. 1915. On the male genital armature of the

Dermaptera. J. R. Microsc. Soc. 35: 521-546.

Cantrell, I, J. 1968. An annotated list of the Der-
maptera, Dictyoptera, Phasmatoptera, and Or-
thoptera of Michigan. Mich. Entomol. 1 : 299-346,

Caudell, A. M 1905, On a collection of Orthoptera
from southern Arizona, with descriptions of new
species, Proc, U.S. Natl. Mus. 28: 461-477.

. 1907. On some Forficulidae of the United

States and West Indies. J. N.Y. Entomol. Soc. 15:
166-170.

. 1913, Notes on Nearctic orthopterous in-

sects: I — Nonsaltatorial forms. Proc. U.S. Natl.

Mus. 44: 595-614,
Crumb, S. E., P. M. Eide. and A. E. Bonn. 1941. The

European earwig. U.S.D,A, Tech, Bull. No, 766,

76 pp.
Dohrn, H. 1862. Die Dermaptera von Mexico. Stett.

Entomol. Zeit. 23: 225-232.
. 1863. Versuch einer Monographie der Der-

mapteren. Stett, Entomol. Zeit. 24: 309-322.
. 1 864a. Versuch einer Monographie der Der-

mapteren. Stett. Entomol. Zeit. 25: 285-296.
— , 1864b. Versuch einer Monographic der Der-

mapteren. Stett. Entomol. Zeit. 25: 417-429.
1865. Versuch einer Monographie der Der-

Fabricius, Entomol. Rec. J, Var. 93: 14-16.

mapteren. Stett. Entomol. Zeit. 26: 68-99.

Eschscholtz, J. F. 1 822. Entomographien. G. Reimer,
Berlin. 128 pp.

Fabricius, J. C. 1 775. Systema entomologiae, sistens
insectorum classes, ordines, genera, species, ad-
jectis synonymis, locis, descriptionibus, observa-
tiombus. Flensburgi and Lipsiae. 832 pp.

. 1 793. Entomologia systematica emendata et

aucta, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species,
adjectis synonimis, locis, observalionibus, des-
criptionibus. II. Hafniae, 62 pp.

Fieber, F. X, 1853. Synopsis der Europaisehcn Or-
thopteren rnit besonderer rucksicht aufdie in Boh-
men vorkommender arten. Lotos 3: 252-261,

Gene, G. 1 832. Saggio di una monographie delle For-
ficule indigene. Ann. Sci. Nat. Regn, Lomb.-Ve-
net, 2: 215-228,

Gerstaecker. C. E. A. 1883. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der

Orthopteren -Fauna Guinea's nach den von R.
Buchholz wahrend der Jahre 1872 bis 1875 da-
selbst gesammelten Arten. Mitt. Naturwiss. ver,
Neu Vorpomm 14: 39-102,

Giles, E. T. 1963. The comparative external mor-
phology and affinities of the Dermaptera. Trans.
R. Entomol. Soc. Lond. 1 15: 95-164.

Gumey, A. B. 1950. An African earwig new to the
United States, and a corrected list of the Nearctic
Dermaptera. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 52; 200-
203.

14

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON

— . 1959. New records of Orthoptera and Der-
maptera from the United States. Florida Entomol.

42: 75-80.

1972. Important recent name changes among

earwigs of the genus Doru (Dermaptera, Forficu-
lidae). Coop. Econ. Insect Rep, (USDA) 22; 182-

185.
Hcbard, M. 1917. Notes on the earwigs (Dermaptera)

of North America, north of the Mexican boundary.

Entomol News 28: 31 1-323.
, 1 922. The ja nei rensis group of the genus Eu-

borellia, with the description of a new species.

Trans. Am + Entomol. Soc\ 47: 319-324,
. 1934, The Dermaptera and Orthoptera of

Illinois. Bull Illinois Nat. Hist. Surv. 20: 1 25-279.
— . 1943. The Dermaptera and orthopterous

families Blattidae, Mantidae and Phasmidae of
Texas. Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 68: 239-310.

Hincks, W. D. 1960. Notes on Dermaptera. Proc. R,
Entomol. Soc. Lond. (B) 29: 155-159.

Knabke, J. J, and A. A. Grigarick. 1971. Biology of
the African earwig, Euborellia cincticolhs (Ger-
staecker) in California and comparative notes on
Eurohellia annulipes (Lucas). Hilgardia 41: 157-
194.

Langston, R. L. 1974. The maritime earwig in Cal-
ifornia (Dermaptera: Carcinophoridae), Pan-Pac,
Entomol. 50: 28-34,

Langston, R. L. and J. A. Powell. 1975. The earwigs
of California (Order Dermaptera). Bull, Calif. In-
sect Surv. 20: 1-25,

Linnaeus, C. 1758, Systema Naturae per regna tria
naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species,
cum characteribus, diffcrentiis, synonymis, locis,
ed, 10, reformata. Holmiae. 823 pp.

Lucas, H, 1847, Description d'une nouvelle espece
dc Forficesila (/\ annulipes). Ann. Soc, Entomol.
Fr. 5: 84-85.

Motschulsky, V, 1863. Essai d'un catalogue des in-
sectes de Tile Ceylan. Bull. Soc. Nat, Moscou 36:
1-153.

Nutting, W, L. and A. B. Gurney. 196L A new earwig
in the genus Vast ox (Dermaptera: Labiidae) from
the southwestern United States and Mexico. Psy-
che 68: 45-52.

Olivier, A. G. 1791. Encyclopedic Methodique, His-
toire Naturelle. Insectes, VI. Cir-Gyr. Paris. 828
pp.

Pallas, P. S. 1773. Reise durch verschiedene Prov-
inzen des Russischen Reiches. St. Petersburg. 2:
701-744,

Popham, E. J, 1 965a. The functional morphology of
the reproductive organs of the common earwig
{Forficula auricidaria) and other Dermaptera with
reference to the natural classification of the order.
J. Zool. 146: 1-43.

. 1965b. A key to Dermapteran subfamilies.

Entomologist (Lond,) 98: 126-136.

Rehn, J. A. G. and M. Hebard. 1912. On the Or-
thoptera found on the Florida Keys and in extreme
southern Florida. I. Proc, Acad, Nat. Sci. Phila.
64: 235-276.

, 1914, United States and Mexican records of

species of the genus Dorit J. N.Y. Entomol. Soc.
22: 89-96.

Sakat, S. 1970a. Dermapterorum catalogus praeli-
minaris 1 . A basic survey for numerical taxonomy
of the Carcinophoridae, Dermaptera of the world.
Spec. Bull. Daito Bunka Univ. No. 1: 1-91,

. 1970b. Dermapterorum catalogus praelimi-

naris 2. A basic survey for numerical taxonomy
ofthe Labiidae, the Dermaptera of the world. Spec.
Bull. Daito Bunka Univ. No. 2: 1-177.

\ 1973. Dermapterorum catalogus praelimi-

naris 7. A basic survey for numerical taxonomy
ofthe Forficulidae, the Dermaptera ofthe world.
Spec. Bull. Daito Bunka Univ. No, 6: 1-357.

Schlinger, E. L, R. V. Bosch, and E. J. Dietrick, 1959.
Biological notes on the predaceous earwig Labi-
dura riparia Pallas, a recent immigrant to Cali-
fornia (Dermaptera, Labiduridac). J. Econ. Ento-
mol. 52: 247-249.

Scudder, G, G, E. and V. R. Vickery. 1985. A tabular
check-list of Canadian orthoptcroid insects. Notes
Lyman Entomol, Mus„ No. 13, 20 pp.

Scudder, S, H, 1862. Materials for a monograph of
the North American Orthoptera, including a cat-
alogue ofthe known New England species, Boston
J. Nat. Hist. 7: 409^480.

. 1876a. A century of Orthoptera. Decade VI.—

Forficulariae, Proc, Boston Soc. Nat. Hist, 18: 257-
264.

, 1876b. Description of three species of Labia

from the southern United States. Proc, Boston Soc.
Nat. Hist. 18: 265-268.

Steinmann, H, 1978. A systematic survey of the
species belonging in the genus Labidura Leach,
1815 (Dermaptera). Acta Zool, Acad. Sci. Hung.
25: 415-423,

. 1981. A study ofthe circumtropical Der-
maptera material in the "Instituut voor Taxon-
omische Zoologic," Amsterdam. Acta Zool. Acad.
Sci. Hung. 27: 187-210.

. 1 984. Synopsis of Dermaptera of the world:

4. Family Carrinophoridac. Entomol, ABH (Dres.)
48: 63-82.

Stephens, J. F. 1835. Illustrations of British Ento-
mology. Vol. 6, Mandibulata. Baldwin and Cra-
dock, London. 240 pp.

Townes, H. K, 1946. Minutes ofthe 558th regular
meeting of the Entomological Society of Wash-
ington. Nov, 1, 1945, Proc. Entomol, Soc, Wash.
48: 47.

Yersin, A. 1 860. Note sur quelques orthoptics nou-
veaux ou peu connus dTurope. Ann. Soc. Ento-
mol. Fr. 8: 509-537.